• Why not take a moment to introduce yourself to our members?

keethrax

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
naesco":32vuoxom said:
Len I have been accused off naughty posting but plead a 'missing comma defense." Here is what I posted

IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS and crap like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines is simply just crap.

Here is what was intended

IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS and COMMA crap like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines BIG COMMA is simply just crap.

I did not call anyone crap.

So you re-edit it to fit. Maybe that *is* what you meant, but I'm positive I could drag up another instance of you name calling that wasn't mentioned, while Mary gets blasted again and again for blanket statements (possibly unfair) while you can get away with personal directed attacks.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
John_Brandt":zvbakm65 said:
But the thing is, I'm going nuts trying to follow and make sense out of your conspiracy theories. You insult me in the process by including me in grand nefarious schemes that are completely false. I often agree with your philosophies, opinions and suggestions but you make so many proclamations and predictions that are completely unfounded and damaging that I want to tune you out. I don't like tuning you out.

John I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I was trying to tell Mary that her USL thing didn't make sense to me. I know your a pretty thickskinned guy. :wink: I love the marinelife I keep and don't really like selling it to the public. That's the God's truth. I just can't for the life of me understand this USL thing at all. People catch and eat this stuff for goodness sake. Allowing some of it to be sacrificed actually ends up protecting more than putting it on this list. You ever seen the videos of the zebras or the water buffalo trying to cross the Nile full of angry crocks? Some end up dying so that others will live. It's a little sad, but then Mother Nature can be a hard lady. These MAC people are supposed to be scientists for Christ sake. I can't for the life of me understand how a scientist could endorse a list based on anything besides sustainability. Not when they understand the hunger and poverty in these developing countries and the fact people are going to eat. One way or another.
Mitch
 

naesco

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
You can't understand the USL thing!

Maybe when you do you will understand why hobbyist's love their fish and other critters. They will go to extreme means to save them and spend thousands on their care.

When you do it will make you a much better person, vendor etc.

Hint (It has something to do with the unecessary death of one of God's creatures)
 

keethrax

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
naesco":1e1ba56d said:
You can't understand the USL thing!

Maybe when you do you will understand why hobbyist's love their fish and other critters. They will go to extreme means to save them and spend thousands on their care.

When you do it will make you a much better person, vendor etc.

Hint (It has something to do with the unecessary death of one of God's creatures)

You want to save them? Don't keep an aquarium. Full stop.

If you keep an aquarium you are responsible for the deaths.

Deal with it, or get out. Yes the damage to can be limited, but it will still exists even if the fish is captured with zero impact on anyhting else.

If you want to treat it as black an dwhite, take the high road, and don't keep an aquarium. If not, realize that nothing is so simple and think before you speak.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Wayne I understand it from a hobbyists point of view. I don't like to see anything die. I can't understand it from a scientists point of view. The goal should be reducing the slaugher of marinelife if possible. The USL just identifies the MAC as outsiders who didn't bother to try and understand the fishers before they decided to fix their problems for them. Don't you ever read any of the stuff Steve posts? :roll:
Mitch
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
naesco":3491fbcf said:
You can't understand the USL thing!

Maybe when you do you will understand why hobbyist's love their fish and other critters. They will go to extreme means to save them and spend thousands on their care.

When you do it will make you a much better person, vendor etc.

Hint (It has something to do with the unecessary death of one of God's creatures)

i don't think mitch said he doesn' t understand what the usl is :wink:

do you realize that tangs are a staple food fish? as are many of the fish we keep as pets ?

is a fisherman who catches your avatar to eat a murderer of one of 'god's creatures'? :lol:

step on any ants lately ?

just because you, or someone else can't keep something alive, doesn't mean no-one can keep it alive :wink:

what about seahorses, naesco ? 20 yrs ago no-one could really keep any of them successfully,save a few people here and there

the situation has changed ALOT since then




so what are the criteria you would use ?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Wayne, I highly suggest you begin reading and comprehending the posts and ideas of others. You may disagree with some of them but many of them have gone out of their way to educate you and explain some of the real life issues that people in this trade (and your hobby) deal with on a daily basis, on their own time and for free. A conversation takes two people, if you are going to ask questions and bring up topics, listen to the answers and give some respect to those who are taking time to talk to you.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Mary, Steve, Mitch--

Please refrain from trying to assign any nefarious intent to anything an NGO or other trade group does based simply on your speculation and assumption. This isn't the place. If you can't show in writing or a link to some proof to what you are claiming please post it elsewhere. Mary, you have a website and can post whatever you like there, Mitch, Steve, the AMDA website may ne a better place for belittling and dragging MAC through the mud at every turn. I understand both of your positions regarding the matter, and know both of your opinions regarding MAC, I'm just not sure that this is the place for speculation, conjecture, and assumption. If you want to post relevant info, we welcome it, amd look forward to discussing it. Just please be careful about posting unsubstantiated opinion as fact.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
dizzy":3ond12mq said:
Annex 20: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) On Transforming the Marine Aquarium Trade
144
stakeholders to ensure that the process is transparent and participatory. In Batasan, the next
CAMP review meeting is scheduled to take place by December 2003.
8.2 What about species inappropriate/unsuitable for the marine aquarium trade?
MAC Certification works with the stakeholders to identify and limit the collection of species that
should not be included in trade through Annex 4 of the MAC Core Standards that allows for those
species not suited to the aquarium trade to be identified and not allowed to be collected or traded.
The MAC Core Standards include Annex 4 on Unsuitable Species, as follows:
The initial designation of a marine aquarium organism as an “unsuitable species” will likely
include organisms for which the requirements for keeping in captivity are well known and clearly
impractical to fulfill. This will undoubtedly include:
· organisms that get too large for most home aquariums (e.g., sharks and rays),
· organisms that are obligate feeders of food that is difficult or expensive to obtain (e.g.,
obligate coral polyp or sponge feeders), and
· organisms that are dangerous or highly venomous (e.g., blue ring octopus).
The sub-committee will develop criteria for reasonable and responsible exceptions to allow for
the small number of these organisms that should be able to go to
· public aquariums and scientific institutions (e.g., documentation that the end buyer is a
public aquarium accredited to the appropriate body, such as the American Zoo and
Aquarium Association) and
· home aquarium keepers who are conducting research into the conditions required to
successfully keep these organisms in captivity.
The sub-committee will periodically review and revise the list. The sub-committee will delete
organisms from the list if and when they are determined to be viable in a certified trade and will
add to the list when other animals are determined to not be viable.
The sub-committee will review and revise the criteria for identifying unsuitable species as more
information becomes available. This will likely include information on
· the ability of a species to survive collection, handling, and transport,
· the ability of a species to survive captivity for a considerable portion of its potential life span,
and
· life history traits that make a species particularly vulnerable to over-exploitation (e.g.,
intrinsic low growth or recruitment rates).
MAC will move forward with the procedures for developing a list of inappropriate species in
trade in 2004. The sub-committee on unsuitable species will be established by the MAC Board as
soon as possible and will include a range of stakeholders with relevant experience and
information from science, conservation, industry and the aquarium hobby. The initial list will
include species that do not survive well in captivity, that grow too big, and that are poisonous.
The MAC Board sub-committee will develop a process for listing species that are rare and/or
particularly vulnerable to over-exploitation. The Unsuitable Species process also provides a
mechanism for evaluating and listing species that are “rare” at any geographic scope, i.e. local
collection area, sub-national, national, international.
At the collection area level, the evaluation and management of rare species can be effectively
implemented through existing procedures. The EFM Standard and the development and

Glenn,
I don't even know what that word you and John used means. Here is where I lifted the page from the MAMTI manifesto. I think it proves much of what I told the AMDA members way back when. Just let people decide for themselves. Fact remains though, if 1. you require sustainability 2. you hold fish to the MAC certification standards 3. Unsuitability is a mute point.
Mitch
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Rover":1h3nz36q said:
Mary, Steve, Mitch--

Please refrain from trying to assign any nefarious intent to anything an NGO or other trade group does based simply on your speculation and assumption. This isn't the place. If you can't show in writing or a link to some proof to what you are claiming please post it elsewhere. Mary, you have a website and can post whatever you like there, Mitch, Steve, the AMDA website may ne a better place for belittling and dragging MAC through the mud at every turn. I understand both of your positions regarding the matter, and know both of your opinions regarding MAC, I'm just not sure that this is the place for speculation, conjecture, and assumption. If you want to post relevant info, we welcome it, amd look forward to discussing it. Just please be careful about posting unsubstantiated opinion as fact.

Well I looked up nefarious intent. I can tell you it is not a word that gets used much in my neck of the bible belt. The carpetbaggers must have brought it down your way. You can rest assured Glenn that I have no room in my heart for wicked intent. On the contrary I have only been trying to see that the truth in all this comes out into the public light. We have a group that seeks to reform and regulate us. By all indications it will not be a voluntary choice. hr4928 is proof of that. Just because we are questioning some of their methods does not prove nefarious intent. How can you be absolutely certain that they (MAMTI) aren't the ones with the nefarious intent. MAMTI was the one that was hidden in the dark. IMO if you truly have wicked plan you do what you suggested Mary, Steve, and I do. You take it to private web site where you know it will play to a more receptive audience. The last thing you would do is bring ithere to a public forum where everyone has a chance to read and debate your ideas. If the intent is truly nefarious it will be challenged and exposed. That is the great thing about this forum. There are a bunch of good people who are willing to donate their time to set the record straight. I would have thought you had figured that out by now. :P
Mitch
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Mitch, that is exactly why things keep going here, because there are always people willing to step up and point out the errors in peoples jugdement, and to argue the little point of all this. I'm just reminding people to stick to black and white (like what you just posted), when dealing with some of the stickier issues. It gives everyone a reference point for discussion and we aren't arguing he said/meant, he didn't say/meant all the time. I certainly don't want to stifle any opinions, I'm just asking that we make an effort to be able to back stuff up whenever possible, or *clearly* lable things as opinion. I think sometimes we assume that other people know where we are coming from, when it isn't always the case.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Actually Rover, it is.

This is the ONLY place where a hobbist can come and get the truth. MAC cetainly isn't handing it out. I take every thing writen in the BB as OPINION of the author, with a few exceptions. I've seen and learned more in here than in any other place. How can you tell them to stop giving their OPINIONs without proof to back it up? If that's the case, then there's nothing to learn here and the only thing left to read will be John's cut and paste news releases.

And Wayne, regardless of where you place the "comma" you still called everyone crap.
IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS and crap like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines is simply just crap.

or

IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS, and crap like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines is simply just crap.

or

IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS and, crap like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines is simply just crap.

or

IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS and crap, like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines is simply just crap.

It should have read like this,
IT IS IN THE HANDS OF THE GOVERNMENT MY FRIENDS, and crap, like you have to let them fish with cyanide because if you prohibit it they will become loggers and log all the trees off the Philippines is simply just crap.

never use the same exclamition word twice in the same sentence, it's redunent
 

John_Brandt

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
dizzy":25jpnf4s said:
Well I looked up nefarious intent. I can tell you it is not a word that gets used much in my neck of the bible belt. The carpetbaggers must have brought it down your way. You can rest assured Glenn that I have no room in my heart for wicked intent. On the contrary I have only been trying to see that the truth in all this comes out into the public light. We have a group that seeks to reform and regulate us. By all indications it will not be a voluntary choice. hr4928 is proof of that. Just because we are questioning some of their methods does not prove nefarious intent. How can you be absolutely certain that they (MAMTI) aren't the ones with the nefarious intent.

Mitch, neither I nor Glenn accused you of nefarious intent. We are concerned that you are accusing people and organizations of nefarious intent.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I certainly don't want to stifle any opinions, I'm just asking that we make an effort to be able to back stuff up whenever possible, or *clearly* lable things as opinion.

Every single one of my posts is clearly labeled as my opinion. Check the sig. I think anyone reading a bb knows going in that every single post is the author's opinion. Maybe there should be a disclaimer in the description of this board:

"Warning: If you are easily offended and/or don't have the courage of your convictions to defend your stance on a topic with something other than "Your mama", enter at your own risk. All whiny babies please report to another board where every living word is moderated to the n-th degree and you don't have to worry about getting your feelings hurt."
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
John_Brandt":6fcby8nn said:
dizzy":6fcby8nn said:
Well I looked up nefarious intent. I can tell you it is not a word that gets used much in my neck of the bible belt. The carpetbaggers must have brought it down your way. You can rest assured Glenn that I have no room in my heart for wicked intent. On the contrary I have only been trying to see that the truth in all this comes out into the public light. We have a group that seeks to reform and regulate us. By all indications it will not be a voluntary choice. hr4928 is proof of that. Just because we are questioning some of their methods does not prove nefarious intent. How can you be absolutely certain that they (MAMTI) aren't the ones with the nefarious intent.

Mitch, neither I nor Glenn accused you of nefarious intent. We are concerned that you are accusing people and organizations of nefarious intent.

John you and Glenn can rest assured I am not accusing anyone of nefarious intent. I reserve the use of inflamatory words like that to describe the actions of people who hate. Or those who want to kill or maim. How dare you suggest I am using it against MAMTI. :evil: There are many questions that remained to be answered about MAMTI and what effect it will have on the independent retailer. Until those questions are answered to my satifaction I will continue to express concerns. Scientists not using good logic always gives me pause.
Mitch
 

John_Brandt

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
dizzy":pntxi18u said:
John you and Glenn can rest assured I am not accusing anyone of nefarious intent. I reserve the use of inflamatory words like that to describe the actions of people who hate. Or those who want to kill or maim. How dare you suggest I am using it against MAMTI. :evil: There are many questions that remained to be answered about MAMTI and what effect it will have on the independent retailer. Until those questions are answered to my satifaction I will continue to express concerns. Scientists not using good logic always gives me pause.
Mitch

Mitch, the definition of nefarious is "extremely wicked or villianous", not killing or maiming people (though killers may be nefarious). In this forum, you have very much accused individuals and organizations of being villianous. Your postings on MAC and MAMTI are fully decorated with these accusations.

Which scientists are not using good logic?
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
John that is an outright and complete lie. I have never accused anyone of naferious intent. Unless the goal of making money for green investors falls under your defintion of naferious intent. I thought it was just the way things get done in this country. What I have done is point out instances where MAC has deceived people. There have been plenty. I didn't try and make the case as to why they chose deception. I have often used the term "ends justify the means". And yes I have accused MAC of that alright and I stick to it. That does not mean I think their intentions are evil. I don't like the way MAC plays the game John. It a bit like planting drugs on rapist just so you can get them off the streets. We may save the reefs and lose our freedoms in the process. If we get to the point where we accept lying and deceiving without even questioning it, we will be greatly dimished as a country. I for one will not stand for it. If you pick the right goals and the right game plan you don't have to lie and cheat to accomplish them. Why don't you guys understand this?
Mitch
 

John_Brandt

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
dizzy":3dz3yqhz said:
I have never accused anyone of naferious intent.


dizzy":3dz3yqhz said:
What I have done is point out instances where MAC has deceived people... And yes I have accused MAC of that alright and I stick to it...I don't like the way MAC plays the game John. It a bit like planting drugs on rapist just so you can get them off the streets...If we get to the point where we accept lying and deceiving without even questioning it, we will be greatly dimished as a country.

The first quote contradicts the group of following quotes. Intentional lying and decieving are nefarious (villianous). When you accuse individuals and organizations of intentional lying and decieving you are accusing them of being villians (nefarious). My use of the term nefarious was proper.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So what do you want us to do, John? Accept everything MAC says at face value? Even when we see inconsistencies and misrepresentations, we're supposed to be quiet because heaven forbid poor little MAC gets their feelings hurt? If MAC had straight forward answers to any of the accusations, then we wouldn't have a problem here. But MAC always gives very nebulous answers to things. And when they actually do give a straight out answer on a topic (which is exceedingly rare) they never follow through (ie cyanide test). Seriously John, what are we supposed to do if we have a problem with something MAC or any other organization has to say? Why don't you want these issues discussed here? Is there some particular wording you need to feel better about us "attacking" MAC?
 

Sponsor Reefs

We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.

Click here to sponsor $10:


Top